This is the second trial of these 2 scumbags that has collapsed with a jury failing to to reach verdicts and now the CPS has been give untill the 29th of May to request a 3rd Trial. Questions are being asked now as to who is on the jury and why has this case took so long due to all video evidence. Rumour's are circulating of pressure on the CPS and police of a mis -carriege of justice on the grounds of causing racial tensions in the Areas of high Muslim Communities. Others see it as just another case of two tier policing.

ttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgzvxrg1z3o

6 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Somethings Wrong.

You can blame the leftist, Wokes

Well Safety when you get the police Attacked with one female officer recieving hospital treatment for a broken nose and the Attackers looking likely to be let off after a second trial it has to be questioned, when someone post's a comment on Social platform is sentanced quickly to 3 years imprisoment.

Thanks for the Red Thumb Joe well done.

A video circulating shows a meeting of Muslims i believe in Rochdale where the speaker said if these 2 brothers are sentanced there will be severe consequencies from the Muslim community. I have tried to locate the Vid but its likely on the dark web somewhere and not on main MSM channels.

Wonder how long the case would be if it was Lucy Connolly in front of a judge and jury if she punched a police officer and broke his nose. Interesting what the Police Federation have to say about this ? whats going to happen if they get a call out where muslims are involved. The 1st thing there going to shout is police brutality, they should refuse to carry out there duty now through fearing there future if a case comes to court, due to this mis - carriege of justice what message will be sent out.

Mohammed Fahir Amaaz has already been found guilty of assaulting the female police officer (Lydia Ward) and is in jail awaiting sentencing. Hopefully the CPS will move for a 3rd trial for the assault on PC Marsden. Maybe that will silence the social media 'outrage' by the extreme right.

4 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Mohammed Fahir Amaaz has already been found guilty of assaulting the female police officer (Lydia Ward) and is in jail awaiting sentencing. Hopefully the CPS will move for a 3rd trial for the assault on PC Marsden. Maybe that will silence the social media 'outrage' by the extreme right.

Yes, I was going to post the exact same thing. Fahir was already found guilty of assaulting two police officers (PC Ellie Cook and PC Lydia Ward) and a member of the public and he's been in prison since his arrest. I hope there is a third trial and they all get the prison time they all deserve. Nasty thugs.

To say that there's a video on "the dark web" (of course) about a "meeting of Muslims" and that caused the hung jury is just ludicrous.

If there was a video like this there would be a legitimate outcry and Tommy Ten Names would have already posted it.

And of course Lucy Connolly is brought up. She pleaded guilty to publishing material intended to stir up racial hated, under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986. She did not have to go to criminal court and a jury trial. The two are not comparable at all. But the right just jump immediately to CONSPIRACY. And even better, a CONSPIRACY on the dark web with secret Muslims meeting to interfere in the criminal justice system and everyone bowing to their secret threats.

It was a vile assault, they deserve to go down, one of them is already going down. Unfortunately hung juries can and do happen.

I don't know enough about the evidence submitted to understand why they couldn't reach a verdict exactly. And nor does anyone else at this point.

7 hours ago, BarraMarra said:

Thanks for the Red Thumb Joe well done.

Are you ok? Obsessed? Paranoid? Help is available for red thumb obsessive paranoid syndrome. I only just joined this thread now.

Get over me, it's creepy.

9 hours ago, SAFETY FIRST said:

You can blame the leftist, Wokes

That´s a very uneducated post! Congrats, you just made a fool out of yourself, per usual!

10 hours ago, BarraMarra said:

This is the second trial of these 2 scumbags that has collapsed with a jury failing to to reach verdicts and now the CPS has been give untill the 29th of May to request a 3rd Trial. Questions are being asked now as to who is on the jury and why has this case took so long due to all video evidence. Rumour's are circulating of pressure on the CPS and police of a mis -carriege of justice on the grounds of causing racial tensions in the Areas of high Muslim Communities. Others see it as just another case of two tier policing.

ttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgzvxrg1z3o

Over 200 people gathered outside the Rochdale police station, demanding justice and chanting slogans against alleged police brutality. The demonstration prompted a larger police investigation into an "outbreak of disorder" that evening.

3 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

Yes, I was going to post the exact same thing. Fahir was already found guilty of assaulting two police officers (PC Ellie Cook and PC Lydia Ward) and a member of the public and he's been in prison since his arrest. I hope there is a third trial and they all get the prison time they all deserve. Nasty thugs.

To say that there's a video on "the dark web" (of course) about a "meeting of Muslims" and that caused the hung jury is just ludicrous.

If there was a video like this there would be a legitimate outcry and Tommy Ten Names would have already posted it.

And of course Lucy Connolly is brought up. She pleaded guilty to publishing material intended to stir up racial hated, under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986. She did not have to go to criminal court and a jury trial. The two are not comparable at all. But the right just jump immediately to CONSPIRACY. And even better, a CONSPIRACY on the dark web with secret Muslims meeting to interfere in the criminal justice system and everyone bowing to their secret threats.

It was a vile assault, they deserve to go down, one of them is already going down. Unfortunately hung juries can and do happen.

I don't know enough about the evidence submitted to understand why they couldn't reach a verdict exactly. And nor does anyone else at this point.

Listen you joebloggs and listen well I do not make up story's for a bit of click bait. I don't post false information why would i open myself and give you a bullet to like you. As for the lucy Connolly crack you thought was funny let me remind you she served three years that thug that assaulted 2 people one recieving a broken nose and a female got 2 years but you cant see a problem. i knew you would post a long winded post usually its half a page and you are a red thumber. You just don't have a backbone to admit to it.

1 hour ago, BarraMarra said:

Listen you joebloggs and listen well I do not make up story's for a bit of click bait. I don't post false information why would i open myself and give you a bullet to like you. As for the lucy Connolly crack you thought was funny let me remind you she served three years that thug that assaulted 2 people one recieving a broken nose and a female got 2 years but you cant see a problem. i knew you would post a long winded post usually its half a page and you are a red thumber. You just don't have a backbone to admit to it.

Oh, calm down snowflake. I have replied to you before when you have had a red thumb paranoia attack to tell you which - if any - were mine. When you posted here about red thumbs I hadn't given you any, but I did subsequently give you one for the Lucy Connolly post as, like I explained, the two cases are COMPLETELY different, so it's a stupid comparison and a logical fallacy and I expressed my disagreement with a downvote which is exactly what they are there for - what is your problem exactly? Does everyone who gives you a thumbs up have to come by and explain why?

No problem admitting thumbs, or agreeing emojis. If ever you feel the need just ask - I'm always here to explain, as I did here. No problem at all. If fact I would support a return to them not being anonymous, it would be better.

My backbone is fine. My knickers are fine too as they don't get all in a twist when I receive a down vote.

Edit: "Listen Joe Bloggs and listen well". Is it some kind of threat now? What odd language. And I didn't say you made it up, but I insinuated you were spreading rumours about a "secret meeting of Muslims" that is out there on the "dark web" without having seen any evidence of it. Well, have you? Have you seen this video? Or are you spreading misinformation that you got from one of your unverified "sources"? Care to say who told you about this dark web video of Muslims secretly meeting to pervert the British criminal justice system?

Because if you claim it exists but haven't seen it it's as good as making it up.

Edited May 21May 21 by josephbloggs

3 hours ago, Gottfrid said:

ago, SAFETY FIRST said:

You can blame the leftist, Wokes

That´s a very uneducated post! Congrats, you just made a fool out of yourself, per usual

Spoken like a true leftist, Woke.

Your type are very hostile, rarely debate or discuss without hate, always with nasty, angry replies.

You people are not educated, have very little knowledge, you guys get so frustrated with yourself, that you reply like a child, an adolescent.

I feel sorry for you low IQ people, your existence must be a miserable life.

Edited May 21May 21 by SAFETY FIRST

2 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

Oh, calm down snowflake. I have replied to you before when you have had a red thumb paranoia attack to tell you which - if any - were mine. When you posted here about red thumbs I hadn't given you any, but I did subsequently give you one for the Lucy Connolly post as, like I explained, the two cases are COMPLETELY different, so it's a stupid comparison and a logical fallacy and I expressed my disagreement with a downvote which is exactly what they are there for - what is your problem exactly? Does everyone who gives you a thumbs up have to come by and explain why?

No problem admitting thumbs, or agreeing emojis. If ever you feel the need just ask - I'm always here to explain, as I did here. No problem at all. If fact I would support a return to them not being anonymous, it would be better.

My backbone is fine. My knickers are fine too as they don't get all in a twist when I receive a down vote.

Edit: "Listen Joe Bloggs and listen well". Is it some kind of threat now? What odd language. And I didn't say you made it up, but I insinuated you were spreading rumours about a "secret meeting of Muslims" that is out there on the "dark web" without having seen any evidence of it. Well, have you? Have you seen this video? Or are you spreading misinformation that you got from one of your unverified "sources"? Care to say who told you about this dark web video of Muslims secretly meeting to pervert the British criminal justice system?

Because if you claim it exists but haven't seen it it's as good as making it up.

Do yourself a favour an F O. Bring it boy if you wanna start name calling. I can't make threats on here.

Edited May 21May 21 by BarraMarra

14 hours ago, BarraMarra said:

Something is wrong

Yes, something is wrong. UK needs you. Return at once to those rain-soaked British shores, mount your trusty Tesco trolley, and gallantly defend Her Majesty’s honor with the fearsome power of a strongly worded letter to The Times.

6 hours ago, SAFETY FIRST said:

Spoken like a true leftist, Woke.

Your type are very hostile, rarely debate or discuss without hate, always with nasty, angry replies.

You people are not educated, have very little knowledge, you guys get so frustrated with yourself, that you reply like a child, an adolescent.

I feel sorry for you low IQ people, your existence must be a miserable life.

Just look how the approval ratings have swung since the election. There you have your answer. Nothing much more to add. There you can talk about uneducated people that blindly believe what an unhinged man says and later finds out that it was just a bunch of rubbish. That´s something the other side knew already and didn´t fall for.

Edited May 22May 22 by Gottfrid

A Leeds man who assaulted a police officer has been sentenced at Leeds Crown Court.  

Jamie Frosdick, aged 33, was allegedly seen driving dangerously in an area near Seacroft by PC Usmaan Akhtar, who was on his way to an unrelated matter, in February of this year.  

Frosdick was seen by PC Akhtar to lose control of the vehicle. He collided with a fence before attempting to flee on foot.

PC Akhtar gave chase on foot, catching up with him near Bowfell Close.  

Frosdick then violently assaulted PC Akhtar, which resulted in him suffering a serious shoulder injury.  

Despite the assault, PC Akhtar was able to detain Frosdick until additional police officers arrived to assist.  

Appearing before the court for sentencing on Wednesday (20 May), Frosdick, of Kentmere Gardens, Seacroft, Leeds, was sentenced to two years and six months’ imprisonment after admitting Actual Bodily Harm against PC Akhtar.  

In a Victim Personal Statement, PC Akhtar said: “What makes this even harder to accept is that all of this violence, all of this trauma, was over something so minor. The defendant did this simply to evade a possible ticket or even just words of advice about the manner of his driving. For something so small, he chose to use extreme violence that has changed the entire course of my life.”

In recognition of PC Akhtar’s professionalism during the incident, he received a Judge’s Commendation for Bravery. 

Image

https://www.westyorkshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/styles/max_1300x1300/public/2026-05/Sentenced%2003_0.png?itok=yQhTq1Ca

News type

Releases

Area

Leeds

Leeds East

More like this on our website

Leeds man jailed for assaulting a police officer

Former teacher jailed for indecent images of children offences

Calderdale Men Jailed For Sexual Abuse Of Teenager

Man And Woman Charged With Attempted Murder, Dewsbury

Keep up to date

• Get a crime update

• Latest news

• Campaigns

• RSS feeds

• WY Community Alert

Get involved

• Do you recognise?

• Events and meetings

• Job opportunities

• Neighbourhood watch

• Volunteer

My neighbourhood

This is Two tier policing and British justice note the name and the award he recieved.

50 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

A Leeds man who assaulted a police officer has been sentenced at Leeds Crown Court.  

Jamie Frosdick, aged 33, was allegedly seen driving dangerously in an area near Seacroft by PC Usmaan Akhtar, who was on his way to an unrelated matter, in February of this year.  

Frosdick was seen by PC Akhtar to lose control of the vehicle. He collided with a fence before attempting to flee on foot.

PC Akhtar gave chase on foot, catching up with him near Bowfell Close.  

Frosdick then violently assaulted PC Akhtar, which resulted in him suffering a serious shoulder injury.  

Despite the assault, PC Akhtar was able to detain Frosdick until additional police officers arrived to assist.  

Appearing before the court for sentencing on Wednesday (20 May), Frosdick, of Kentmere Gardens, Seacroft, Leeds, was sentenced to two years and six months’ imprisonment after admitting Actual Bodily Harm against PC Akhtar.  

In a Victim Personal Statement, PC Akhtar said: “What makes this even harder to accept is that all of this violence, all of this trauma, was over something so minor. The defendant did this simply to evade a possible ticket or even just words of advice about the manner of his driving. For something so small, he chose to use extreme violence that has changed the entire course of my life.”

In recognition of PC Akhtar’s professionalism during the incident, he received a Judge’s Commendation for Bravery. 

Image

https://www.westyorkshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/styles/max_1300x1300/public/2026-05/Sentenced%2003_0.png?itok=yQhTq1Ca

News type

Releases

Area

Leeds

Leeds East

More like this on our website

Leeds man jailed for assaulting a police officer

Former teacher jailed for indecent images of children offences

Calderdale Men Jailed For Sexual Abuse Of Teenager

Man And Woman Charged With Attempted Murder, Dewsbury

Keep up to date

• Get a crime update

• Latest news

• Campaigns

• RSS feeds

• WY Community Alert

Get involved

• Do you recognise?

• Events and meetings

• Job opportunities

• Neighbourhood watch

• Volunteer

My neighbourhood

This is Two tier policing and British justice note the name and the award he recieved.

In part are you referring to the 30 month sentence for ABH being a bit strong?............Alot would depend on his previous, his attitude in court, any mitigating circumstances and to a greater degree, the fact that the victim is a police officer.

If you don't live in the UK you won't see what this is about with an ongoing trial of two muslims attacking police officers at Manchester Airport.

On 5/21/2026 at 1:53 PM, BarraMarra said:

A video circulating shows a meeting of Muslims i believe in Rochdale where the speaker said if these 2 brothers are sentanced there will be severe consequencies from the Muslim community. I have tried to locate the Vid but its likely on the dark web somewhere and not on main MSM channels.

That sounds like a criminal threat to me. If this video is genuine and publicly circulating, then the Police will almost certainly already be aware of it.

Anyone openly threatening “severe consequences” if a court delivers a sentence they dislike should be investigated - regardless of religion, race or background. In the UK, public threats aimed at influencing the justice system are a serious matter.

Let’s be honest here - if you, me, or a group of white British men publicly made statements that could be interpreted as intimidation or threats toward the courts, we’d likely be arrested, questioned, dragged through the media, and put under intense scrutiny very quickly.

That’s why many people feel there’s now a clear inconsistency in how policing is applied in Britain. Equal treatment under the law should mean exactly that - equal treatment for everyone.

9 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

That sounds like a criminal threat to me. If this video is genuine and publicly circulating, then the Police will almost certainly already be aware of it.

Anyone openly threatening “severe consequences” if a court delivers a sentence they dislike should be investigated - regardless of religion, race or background. In the UK, public threats aimed at influencing the justice system are a serious matter.

Let’s be honest here - if you, me, or a group of white British men publicly made statements that could be interpreted as intimidation or threats toward the courts, we’d likely be arrested, questioned, dragged through the media, and put under intense scrutiny very quickly.

That’s why many people feel there’s now a clear inconsistency in how policing is applied in Britain. Equal treatment under the law should mean exactly that - equal treatment for everyone.

There is absolutely no evidence this video exists. It's a rumour, almost certainly completely unfounded, and intended to stir up more trouble and hatred.

If it really existed - and somebody must have seen it for it to be known about - then why has Tommy Ten Names not posted it? He's not exactly one to hang back is he.

It's clearly a fantasy designed to foment hatred and distrust. Just like we have seen so many times before.

I will say it here: there is no such video. If there is and it surfaces then I will apologise and join the cries for punishment of those involved. But I am not going to get all angry based on an completely unsubstantiated rumour that it's "probably on the dark web".

Edited May 23May 23 by josephbloggs

17 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

If you don't live in the UK you won't see what this is about with an ongoing trial of two muslims attacking police officers at Manchester Airport.

yes, outrageous................... I can't comment on their case, not privvy to the nitty gritty.........my point above is that every case is very very different, and without exact case details, it's impossible to make a proper comparison.........

I would add that if the UK genuinely has two tier policing, then the country Is in real trouble....................

16 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

There is absolutely no evidence this video exists. It's a rumour, almost certainly completely unfounded, and intended to stir up more trouble and hatred.

If it really existed - and somebody must have seen it for it to be known about - then why has Tommy Ten Names not posted it? He's not exactly one to hang back is he.

It's clearly a fantasy designed to foment hatred and distrust. Just like we have seen so many times before.

I will say it here: there is no such video. If there is and it surfaces then I will apologise and join the cries for punishment of those involved. But I am not going to get all angry based on an completely unsubstantiated rumour that it's "probably on the dark web".

You are chasing the dichotomy here by immediately implying fabrication, while at the same time showing your own bias through terms such as “Tommy Ten Names”. Personal ridicule is not an argument - it usually weakens one.

I actually agree that the phrase “probably on the dark web” sounds overly dramatic and speculative. However, it is also true that highly inflammatory videos are often removed from mainstream platforms for breaching moderation policies, public order concerns, or because platforms fear escalating community tensions. That is not a conspiracy theory - content moderation on major platforms is well established.

Personally, I remain sceptical of claims from all sides. I’ve seen cases where translations have been misleading or selectively edited, and I’ve also seen genuine footage removed or suppressed because it conflicted with a preferred public narrative. Both things can be true.

That is precisely why I avoid loaded or dismissive language such as “wokerati”, “deep state”, “big pharma”, “covidiots”, or indeed “Tommy Ten Names”. Once debate descends into slogans and mockery, rational discussion disappears with it.

In this case, I have not personally seen the alleged video. However, another poster states that he has. Therefore, there are really only two logical possibilities:

1. He is knowingly fabricating the claim entirely - and thus you are calling him a lair.

2. The video does exist and was seen before being removed or becoming difficult to locate.

Neither possibility can simply be assumed without evidence.

I would want to highlight that there have been previous public incidents in the UK where crowds or activists have made statements implying unrest, disorder, or retaliation if legal proceedings did not go in a direction they supported. Given that history, it is not irrational to think such a video exists.

I have personally watched videos in which ordinary Palestinians - not identifiable Hamas fighters, but civilians including middle-aged women - openly celebrated the October 7th attacks. In some of those clips, the killing of civilians and even reports of rape and murdered children were spoken about approvingly or with open celebration.

Those videos do still exist online, although many are now significantly harder to locate through mainstream platforms and search engines. That naturally makes me sceptical of the idea that the public narrative we are presented with is always complete or neutral. There is unquestionably a great deal of filtering, moderation, selective amplification, and de-platforming occurring across modern media ecosystems.

I have also personally witnessed real-world events firsthand, only to later see them described online - including on X/Twitter - in ways that were either misleading, selectively edited, or later “fact-checked” as false despite contradicting what I had directly observed myself. Experiences like that inevitably make people less willing to accept institutional narratives uncritically.

That does not mean every claim is true, nor does it justify conspiracy thinking. It simply means healthy scepticism is reasonable.

So in this case, I agree with you on one important point: before drawing firm conclusions, I would still want to see the actual footage and assess the context properly for myself - but I'm not calling BarraMarra a liar.

Based on what I have already seen people publicly say during periods of political or religious tension, I do not find it remotely implausible that such comments could have been made. Sadly, history shows that when emotions and tribalism are inflamed, some people are absolutely capable of making threatening or extremist statements openly and without hesitation - and its perfectly feasible to me that such commentary has been made and then removed to prevent further conflict.

11 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

You are chasing the dichotomy here by immediately implying fabrication, while at the same time showing your own bias through terms such as “Tommy Ten Names”. Personal ridicule is not an argument - it usually weakens one.

I actually agree that the phrase “probably on the dark web” sounds overly dramatic and speculative. However, it is also true that highly inflammatory videos are often removed from mainstream platforms for breaching moderation policies, public order concerns, or because platforms fear escalating community tensions. That is not a conspiracy theory - content moderation on major platforms is well established.

Personally, I remain sceptical of claims from all sides. I’ve seen cases where translations have been misleading or selectively edited, and I’ve also seen genuine footage removed or suppressed because it conflicted with a preferred public narrative. Both things can be true.

That is precisely why I avoid loaded or dismissive language such as “wokerati”, “deep state”, “big pharma”, “covidiots”, or indeed “Tommy Ten Names”. Once debate descends into slogans and mockery, rational discussion disappears with it.

In this case, I have not personally seen the alleged video. However, another poster states that he has. Therefore, there are really only two logical possibilities:

1. He is knowingly fabricating the claim entirely - and thus you are calling him a lair.

2. The video does exist and was seen before being removed or becoming difficult to locate.

Neither possibility can simply be assumed without evidence.

I would want to highlight that there have been previous public incidents in the UK where crowds or activists have made statements implying unrest, disorder, or retaliation if legal proceedings did not go in a direction they supported. Given that history, it is not irrational to think such a video exists.

I have personally watched videos in which ordinary Palestinians - not identifiable Hamas fighters, but civilians including middle-aged women - openly celebrated the October 7th attacks. In some of those clips, the killing of civilians and even reports of rape and murdered children were spoken about approvingly or with open celebration.

Those videos do still exist online, although many are now significantly harder to locate through mainstream platforms and search engines. That naturally makes me sceptical of the idea that the public narrative we are presented with is always complete or neutral. There is unquestionably a great deal of filtering, moderation, selective amplification, and de-platforming occurring across modern media ecosystems.

I have also personally witnessed real-world events firsthand, only to later see them described online - including on X/Twitter - in ways that were either misleading, selectively edited, or later “fact-checked” as false despite contradicting what I had directly observed myself. Experiences like that inevitably make people less willing to accept institutional narratives uncritically.

That does not mean every claim is true, nor does it justify conspiracy thinking. It simply means healthy scepticism is reasonable.

So in this case, I agree with you on one important point: before drawing firm conclusions, I would still want to see the actual footage and assess the context properly for myself - but I'm not calling BarraMarra a liar.

Based on what I have already seen people publicly say during periods of political or religious tension, I do not find it remotely implausible that such comments could have been made. Sadly, history shows that when emotions and tribalism are inflamed, some people are absolutely capable of making threatening or extremist statements openly and without hesitation - and its perfectly feasible to me that such commentary has been made and then removed to prevent further conflict.

Nope, I am not calling BarraMarra a liar at all. He posted what he believes / what he's been told - that there is a secret video circulating on the dark web of secret Muslims having a secret meeting to pervert the course of justice. He didn't claim he had seen it, just that he had heard about it.

To me it sounds made up - not by Barra, but by somebody whose intention is to foment further distrust and hatred of Muslims. Lots of people have that agenda and all they have to do is start a rumour and it gets pounced on - see the Southport riots for a perfect example.

40 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Nope, I am not calling BarraMarra a liar at all. He posted what he believes / what he's been told - that there is a secret video circulating on the dark web of secret Muslims having a secret meeting to pervert the course of justice. He didn't claim he had seen it, just that he had heard about it.

To me it sounds made up - not by Barra, but by somebody whose intention is to foment further distrust and hatred of Muslims. Lots of people have that agenda and all they have to do is start a rumour and it gets pounced on - see the Southport riots for a perfect example.

Fair comment - its still remains perfectly feasible that a video such comments were made, that such a video exist and that attempts have been made to remove the video from circulation, certainly by all mainstream platforms.

On 5/21/2026 at 3:43 PM, brewsterbudgen said:

...

Maybe that will silence the social media 'outrage' by the extreme right.

To correct you, it is social media 'outrage' by everyday, non-political citizens - the vast majority of the British population.

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

That sounds like a criminal threat to me. If this video is genuine and publicly circulating, then the Police will almost certainly already be aware of it.

Anyone openly threatening “severe consequences” if a court delivers a sentence they dislike should be investigated - regardless of religion, race or background. In the UK, public threats aimed at influencing the justice system are a serious matter.

Let’s be honest here - if you, me, or a group of white British men publicly made statements that could be interpreted as intimidation or threats toward the courts, we’d likely be arrested, questioned, dragged through the media, and put under intense scrutiny very quickly.

That’s why many people feel there’s now a clear inconsistency in how policing is applied in Britain. Equal treatment under the law should mean exactly that - equal treatment for everyone.

A mob surrounded Rochdales Police station chanting threats to the police inside any of them arrested No ? If a mob of whites did the same the media would be there filming it and arrests would be swift infront of the film crew naturally then the next day Starmer would be holding a press conference calling them right wing thugs intent of racially aggrevated hatred, and i will never allow it.

8 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

A mob surrounded Rochdales Police station chanting threats to the police inside any of them arrested No ? If a mob of whites did the same the media would be there filming it and arrests would be swift infront of the film crew naturally then the next day Starmer would be holding a press conference calling them right wing thugs intent of racially aggrevated hatred, and i will never allow it.

If you had any videos - it would help the discussion.